~ A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you … John 13:34

On the ‘Titanic’?

I don’t know that, for me at least, the focus of my wanderings is on what I would call “incidentals.” And certainly not to the exclusion of such “weightier matters.” Rather, I find myself wavering between Catholicism and Orthodoxy out of a desire for fullness. So the “incidentals” become something not incidental at all because they are an integral part of the fullness.

which, as always with him, set the mind to work.

My comment was inspired by a sense of frustration that in the face of the attacks to which Christianity is subject, our churches are far from united, and grown adult men who are certainly bright enough to know that the addition of the filioque to the Creed does not mean that Rome believes in double-procession, still seem to think it a barrier to acting together. Knowing a little of the history of the Church in the fifth and sixth centuries, it reminds me of how the disunity which followed Chalcedon in 451, weakened Christianity and helped pave way for the rise of Islam. Well, those who will not learn from history will be taught their lesson until they do.

Now the point here is that those involved in the Christological disputes which my co-author has described all thought they were arguing over ‘essentials’ – but what was the result? Within a few hundred years many of the inhabitants of Egypt and Syria were Muslim. Those who rejected the results of the Council of Florence (1438/9) on the Orthodox side thought they were arguing over essentials. In 1453 the Eastern Roman Empire ceased to exist and thousands were killed or sold off into slavery, and Constantinople became a Muslim city.

There are, of course, those zealots who would hold that these were prices worth paying to retain the purity of the Faith. My reaction is incredulity. Just what was so important that it justified leaving the door open to the expansion of Islam, thus condemning countless millions over a thousand years and more to be deprived of the riches of Christianity and the salvation it brings? Could anything have been worth that?

Well, in our times the enemy is writ large. It is out there as visible as the iceberg which sunk the Titanic. But our captains are arguing over who should be captain and what it means to be a captain; our wireless operators aren’t keen on sharing data, and our look-outs are debating the meaning of the words ‘iceberg’. Nor is it clear we have enough life-boats. But by all means, let us argue over the placing of the deck-chairs.

Long experience of being in a position of privilege and even superiority in the West make us indignant over losing some of these things. But what is at stake is so much more than that – it is the souls of millions. If we, as Christians do not sort ourselves out and begin to see that there are real dangers out there in the water, then we shall, as our ancestors in the Middle East and the Balkans did, a huge price. We might choose to take that on – but should we make that choice for generations unborn? Or for generations which will not be born?

Post navigation

59 thoughts on “On the ‘Titanic’?”

Very close parallels, I think, and the enemy is two fold this time, we all know that. We continue our internecine arguments that have developed over the last 500 years of external peace at our peril. The enemy is at the gates, shall we continue to argue over things that a loving God might overlook anyway or shall we man the battlements against our very real and very active enemies.

It might entirely be that we have different ideas of what is “incidental.” I was thinking generally of such essential things as the Divine Liturgy, the Eucharist, and different theological perceptions. I don’t consider these to be merely “incidental.” So then the question becomes where do we draw the line at essential and incidental? And how far are we willing to toss aside certain beliefs and practices in the interest of unity? At what price are willing to accept such unity?
I’m not sure of the answers to any of these questions, but they may show why unity is such a seemingly hard goal to accomplish. It’s true that we have to face dangers, but it’s just as important to first make sure we are facing the right direction.

I am assuming that the Roman Church would allow a lot of leeway in the Divine Liturgy and Eucharist as it has to many validly accepted Masses in the Eastern Catholic Churches and elsewhere. I’m not sure what the theological perceptions are you speak of as the only two, in my mind, which are principle considerations are: Is the Pope the leader of the Church and therby vested in Christ’s authority to establish doctrine and secondly, the filioque argument. If those 2 principle differences cannot be changed, I think a ‘false peace’, religiously and theologically speaking, are out of the question; as they are de fide teaching in the Roman Church and effects not only our Creed but the issue of uniting under a common Vicar of Christ. It is a mess to be sure and a scandal to the unity of Christ’s One Church.

Ah my friend, even were Rome to agree, there is no one who could speak for the Orthodox to do the same. Still, it may be that we have to endure chastisement with scorpions before our hard hearts will melt.

I tend to agree. It is the same “peace” that some Protestants are proposing: accepting the Pope as a ‘figure head’ in the same way as the Queen of England.

At least we know the Church will endure and we know that persecution and scandal will endure and we even know that Christ will have other flocks. So as Lord of History, I guess God will help us patch up all the holes we’re putting in the old Bark of Peter by letting us bounce off of iceberg after iceberg in His absence.

It may be that I misunderstood Jess’s premise here on these two posts. I was under the impression that she was referring to more than just Catholicism and Orthodoxy. I would love for there to be Catholic-Orthodox unity. I think both churches may even NEED each other.
But I was under the impression that Jess was speaking of a much wider unity and thus, my worries about theology, liturgy, etc. There are some denominations out there that seem to embrace theology that many historical church thinkers and church councils have condemned as heresy. Such a unity would be unacceptable.
However, as I said, I may have interpreted Jess’s statements as casting much wider than they were meant to be taken.

Interesting questions my friend, and ones which, if we can’t find an answer, we may never have a chance to find out. Imagine what would have happened had the Turks taken Vienna in 1689 and kept going westwards/ Greece might never have been free, and Orthodoxy might be even smaller than it is now, and Catholicism have gone under Islam too.
Well, it did not happen then – but should we assume it can’t now? Yes, Liturgy matters, but we none of us know what Liturgy the Apostles followed, and if we put it before preservation of the Faith, then future generations may never have even what we have; that is my fear.

Well, I guess I don’t spend much time thinking about what “might have been.” As to what may come, none of us can really know either. While Christianity in Europe may be a shadow of what it once was, I don’t worry about Christianity in general. Latin America, Africa, Asia. The Church has been growing in these areas and I’m rather excited to see what voices, what re-presentations of the unchanging Tradition, will emerge.
While none of us can know the future for sure, I trust God’s promise that He has established his Church and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it. All I can do is be the best Christian I can be where I am and let the Holy Spirit do the rest.
And I would say that the Liturgy and preservation of the Faith are one and the same. As the Church prays, so the Church believes. And the Liturgy is the church’s great prayer, the Church’s raison d’etre.
But you also reminded me of something I meant to add on to my daily post and forgot about, so I’ll have to add a part 2 when I get some time. So thanks for reminding me, even if you didn’t intend to!

I agree my friend, and in some ways wanted to invite a discussion. When I read about the way in which the Catholic Bishops of England and Wales treats some Papal pronouncements, I suspect that it might be hard for others to be less obedient.

The Pope is crucial. I do not see how any unity is possible unless an agreement is come to on his Primacy of Honour and a meaning is attached to that which makes him at least the umpire on matters of difficulty – but then, as you say, I am very much a Catholic Anglican, and I have no problem (quite the opposite) with Papal Infallibility.

You are quite right. The Church will never, or better said, can never change any of what is considered part of the Deposit of Faith given to the Church by Christ and the apostles. Those are untouchable and any patch up without agreeing to these items will only lead to a “false peace” between faiths. What the Pope and Church are hopeful for, is simply working together on things of the faith where we do agree. There are a lot of things that we can do to change society and ideologies that are driving us further from any sort of Christian influence in the world. It is at least a starting point. As the Episcopal Church is collapsing many have found their way into the Catholic faith as have many of you own Anglican Church. It’s been the best renewal that we have seen, at least here in the States, that the flocks are getting tired of the separation, if not the leadership. We have an entire Anglican parish that left and came into the Roman Church in my neighboring city and they are probably the finest parish in the city. Some hope is still out there for the future but in my opinion the theological leaderships will not be able to mend the divide. The people may abandon one church for another but the leadership is locked in a no-win struggle.

The eastern church is Catholic, or as it is said, we of the west and the east are the two lungs of one church of one body. Both are Apostolic churches. I am glad in a way that there are two churches in one. The Churches are both in the world and the world is of power, power of the persons involved in the temporal world and the lack of the will to give up that power. I am glad that the Holy Father has the mirror of the eastern church to give him reflections on what the Holy Spirit says and what we the body will bring forth from the distorted reflections we see and hear with our sinful natures.
When the Eastern and Western churches say as brothers ”I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church, we are one and praying for each other. The appearance of the host is bread, but in the actualizing of reality that exist with God, we are one body. The difficulties of the two churches is like the overturning of a canoe, a little bailing and we can climb back in and paddle on our way. The threat of Islam is real and it has been real since the fall of King John of Christian Egypt. The destruction of the reform churches follow, what that most unhappy, unwilling prophet of the Lord, Nietzsche wrote. The watchman must keep the walls in good repair to save us from our enemies and the reform churches are part of our walls and they are failing day by day, until they have the strength of mud, not of stone. We know not the hour, God’s way is not our way, Islam is now shoulder to shoulder with us, so Christ’s face (Isa) and God’s will can now be known to them. We have Mary as our help and the promise that the gates of Hell will not overcome the church.

Tom, I think you may be getting Eastern Catholics (who are in union with Rome) mixed up with Eastern Orthodoxy which isn’t which are the two lungs of which our Pope spoke. There is a much wider divide with the Orthodox that I fear will never be surmounted and as ‘crossingthebosporus’ pointed out, all the other protestant churches as well. Some will leave their churches and come into the church but that may be all we can expect.

As far as the growth of the Church in Asia and Africa, even with that influx, the Church for the first time in her history has made no gain in the world of religion. We have been sitting at 17.5% of the world population for some time now. The other thing that is worrisome to the Vatican is that those persons who are on the roles as Catholic are not getting Confirmed, not going to Mass, and not getting married in the Catholic Church. I just downloaded that news item last week and posted it on my blog.

The gates of hell will not prevail but will their be any faith left when He returns? It may be but a remnant if we are not vigilant in our faith.

I see no problem with a smaller church. We have an ocean of Catholics in America that take this piece then that piece and starve. We in the military are in the time of small units of 12 men who are highly trained with closely defined missions, replacing large units whose mission preformance would not be efficient as the small units. I see a large increase of Catholics. People always look because we are all searching for God and we will wait and Christ will win. Islam is the iceberg we fear will sink the church, but the church is not the RMS Titanic. Islam kills you if you leave and that leaves a question is why, and in that why is a search. A search for freedom and a search for God. I fear the clash of civilizations but I do not fear the end. A wrecked ship overtimes turns into flotsam and jetsam. From the beach the ship looks solid and healthy but it is dead, I think Islam looks alive but it is dead.

I don’t know if this counts as “incidentals” but it is certainly possible to live our individual lives in such a way to invite others to join us and experience the joy we share in Christ Jesus. This point has been made recently by our Pope when he declared that we need a new type of apologist these days. He went on to point out that the old ways of appealing to reason and arguing theologically is lost on deaf ears in our day. Our age is one of experiential reasoning, if you can call it that and we see it in both religious and secular life. It’s all about how something feels. I’m afraid I probably won’t be much use to our Pope with the new apologetics as I am firmly in the old school and will continue to make the argument to reason. However, I don’t see why I can’t be joyful, prayerful, generous and all the other attributes that any good Christian is called to be. Maybe that is all there is to it. What do you think?

I’m amused as well! The only thing that I understand out of this new ‘apologetic’ is that today people are drawn to people and the way they live their lives as opposed to a good rational argument. I tend to agree when I look at the state of politics these days. You will never find a rational argument from anyone that will change the mind of someone from the opposite point of view. Our educational systems have quit teaching logic or critical thinking skills. From your perspective and mine as well, I find that amazing — but a good understanding of the problems that the Church faces in evangelization. David, I can’t flesh it out, because even the Church has not done so yet. They are starting their plunge into the New Evangelization this October with The Year of Faith. It is an attempt to get people to be more committed to their faith and to deepen their walk with Christ in an effort to carry Christ into the world in a way that maybe reason can’t.

I’m not kidding! Have you talked to some youngsters these days? It’s all about how something feels! Maybe we should give them some warm and fuzzy jamies and tell them they came from God. I don’t know how we get through to secular individuals today. The evangelicals are all about this kind of thing but they lack doctrine once the people get more into their faith: that’s when they show up at my inquiry class at the Catholic Church. I get plenty of them.

jessia – ”what you would think the ‘essentials’ are.”
For me the essentials are the Eucharist because it gives us grace and tears to make us human.
2. the two commandments that Christ has given us, which is core of what we seek if we are to follow Christ and do God’s will.
3. Feed the hungry, clothe the naked,….heal those of a broken spirit. Mt 25:35
Those are my essentials.

servusfidelis – you maybe right, but to me the differences that divide the churches on the spiritual side is warm breath on a mirror. When I think of the heresies of the first 3 centuries, I think not too bad. I think the churches holding a common deposit of faith from the apostles will be forced in the coming age of new martyrs to be one in essentials. My church will be martyred and in martyrium is strength. This my priests have told me. I hold in my mind the Tunisian young man who converted and prayed while he was killed. Who among us can claim to be as brave? For the reform churches I see them becoming the world.

I am pondering that David – I think this is going to be tomorrow’s post, and you chaps have written so well, that I have plenty of material to sleep on – but whether I can do justice to it, I doubt, but I shall do my best🙂

Such may be the case Tom. From my seat in the back of the room I feel that we have been arguing the faith at the level of diplomats and not from the level of souls actively trying to do what Christ asked: that we be holy as My Father is Holy. It’s a tall order and if we don’t get back to trying to get ourselves on track individually, I don’t see that it will make any difference at all if the diplomats of the faith come up with some ingenious way to put us together. I just think that any true union of people must have a common bond. That bond should be Christ and if we have died to self and put on the new man, then it is no longer I but Christ who is living in this world and evangelizing. I think we put too much emphasis on the externals without first fixing the internals.

So, maybe what I should be saying is that the deposit of faith is a non-negotiable so that my point is more clear. If the Church ever got rid of any teaching in the Deposit of Faith, I would immediately declare myself an atheist as Christ would no longer be Divine and His Church no longer valid. It would just be an institution of men to live a nice life. 🙂

I agree with the rotating pray, but for the Eucharist. What comes to me on the Eucharist I am reminded in 1949 the communists crucified the a priest on the church’s door. They seized him during the reception of Eucharist spilling 37 hosts on the floor of the church. The church was boarded up and a young Chinese woman crawl in the first night and picked up one host on her tongue and she did this night after night and at the end she was discovered and crucified also. I read my way into the Roman church and I believe the host is the body and blood of our Lord, therefore the most holy thing in the church. I know I am not worthy maybe no one is worthy, but I know it should be guarded. If it is wish of the Holy Father then so be it, if it is not so be it.

Is there such a creature living that believes that the Eucharist is truly the Body and Blood of Christ but is not a member of the Church? I don’t know if I ever met one. To believe it, you must also then believe in the apostolic priesthood as well so that someone is able to consecrate the bread and wine for the Sacramental elements.

How would it help if they believed this but denied all the other teachings? That would deny the apostolic teachings that were ratified and expounded on in future councils. It seems to me that at least symbolically, sharing communion is an act of being in communion with the Church. If not, then isn’t it a contradiction in the very act itself.

I like prayer in communion. It is something we can all do together. But we would have to be careful not to hurt sensitivities on prayers to Mary or the Saints or for the dead.

Indeed. A hard one this, becauseIdi understand that a sharpest Eucharist should be the goal of union, and why some object tout being a means – but all I can say is that for me it has been a means to that goal.

We all have our traditions, as well as Tradition, andI wonder if there is something in the latter which unites where the former so often bears the marks of the history which divides us?

It is a hard one. I think we just need a bunch of Bernard of Clairvaux’s or Padre Pio’s. People are always attracted to holiness when they see it. I wonder how many people became Catholic just by witnessing the works of Mother Teresa. A loss of the sense of sin and now a sense of holiness is the most dire sense that I get out of society today. I hope that some will arrive to put that right.

Good points. I have to say that for me, The Blessed John Paul II was a decisive influence in overcoming childhood stories hostile to the Church. His patent holiness convinced me that I needed to know more about his Church.

David – Sorry I sounded harsh but what I had in mind was the Wonder bread and grape juice brigade, taking the Eucharist. The preacher is holy in that church because he holds the gospel gun, the Eucharist is holy in ours.

My belief is very simple and the rest is just a journey in beauty. I do what Christ calls for and for the rest is beyond my pay grade. I will give an example of how we are all slaves, I was in Dejvica waiting for the 133 bus and I had an ice cream, as I walked out I saw a man fall, I thought what if he is drunk, what will the people think, what will people think, what will people think and i just helped him up, We carry so much weight, if we do not think but just do as we are asked we are free. Americans will not look at the poor because it reminds them there for a paycheck there goes me. I found by serving the poor the greatest gifts in my life, I do not worry about going to heaven, I know I am not worthy, but that is beyond my pay grade.

It seems very easy to come up with essentials but not so easy to find your incidentals. So where does this leave us other than talking in vague niceties about things that we woulda, coulda, shoulda done.

Jessica, your way with words and ideas is so beautiful and impactful. The enemy is truly writ large. The summation of the law and the prophets is love. I must search my heart yet again. Thanks for the invitation🙂

Trying to be a man who pleases God<br>“Nothing is more certain, than that our manners, our civilization, and all the good things . . . in this European world of ours, depended for ages upon two principles: and were indeed the result of both combined; I mean the spirit of the gentleman, and the spirit of religion” (Burke)